On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 06:20:09PM -0500, Tycho Andersen wrote: > Idea 1 sounds best to me, but maybe that's because it's the way I > originally did the fd support that never landed :) > > But here's an Idea 4: we add a way to remotely close an fd (I don't > see that the current infra can do this, but perhaps I didn't look hard > enough), and then when you get ENOENT you have to close the fd. Of > course, this can't be via seccomp, so maybe it's even more racy. Or better yet: what if the kernel closed everything it had added via ADDFD if it didn't get a valid response from the supervisor? Then everyone gets this bug fixed for free. Tycho _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
